Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax
Posted in:
* 3:27 pm - I’ll have more in a few, but you can read the indictment by clicking here. [Fixed link.]
* Earlier today, West Side Ald. Jason Ervin demanded that Rep. Smith either “get back to work” or step down…
Ald. Jason Ervin (28th) said it is “totally unacceptable” for Smith to stay at home and collect his state paycheck — and miss 150 votes — at a time when billions of dollars in decisions impacting pension and budget issues are being decided in Springfield.
“Either go back to work or step down,” said Ervin, who is among those ward bosses who would choose Smith’s replacement.
“I’m not trying to force him out. I’m trying to get service to the residents of the 28th Ward. It’s not about him stepping down. It’s about him going to work. Do one or the other. But to stay at home, collect a check and do nothing is not acceptable.”
* Ald. Ervin also suggested that appointed state Rep. Smith could stay on the ballot and run this November for a full term. From a press release…
Under Illinois law, State Rep. Smith could resign his current appointment, which ends in January 2013, and focus on his defense. If acquitted on federal charges, as winning the Democratic Primary last month, he has a spot on the November ballot, and will still be able to run as a candidate in the General Election in November. The temporary resignation would allow the Representative Committee to name a replacement to complete the remainder of the term.
* Gov. Pat Quinn told reporters today that if Smith stays on the ballot “there are opportunities for other candidates to come forward from that district that have better records than Rep. Smith has,” adding, “The voters, I think, are capable of electing a good person on November 6th.” Listen…
* It appears that the feds recovered part of the alleged $7,000 bribe from Smith, but not all of it. From the indictment…
The interests of the defendant subject to forfeiture pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section, 981(a)(1)(C) and Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), include, but are not limited to, approximately $4,500 representing unrecovered proceeds of the crime alleged in the foregoing Indictment.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 3:28 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Good riddance. He needs to either step down today, or be removed tomorrow.
Comment by How Ironic Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 3:37 pm
The link to indictment does not work.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 3:41 pm
===But to stay at home, collect a check and do nothing is not acceptable.===
I agree. I think Smith should show up every session day and get his per diem too. Why leave money on the table?
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 3:46 pm
You might have to open the pdf in a new tab. Or save it and open it if you can’t open it directly online.
Comment by Lil' Enchilada Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 4:06 pm
Alderman Ervin misses the point.
Under the Illinois Constitution, Smith can only be removed by the House once for the same offense.
Because of the double jeopardy provision, if he is “impeached” by the House now, he can’t be removed by the House a second time. If he resigns now, however, the House gets a second bite at the apple.
In other words, he ain’t gonna resign unless its part of a plea deal with the feds.
Frankly, I don’t think he will resign, and here’s what I predict:
1. The House will remove him.
2. He will remain on the ballot and lose to an independent candidate in the fall.
3. His case will go to trial, and he will be acquitted.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 4:07 pm
===if he is “impeached” by the House now, he can’t be removed by the House a second time.===
He won’t be removed. If he’s removed now then somehow manages to win in November, the House will just prevent him from ever taking the seat.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 4:11 pm
“An indictment is not a conviction or admission of guilt …” (just to have that out there…)
This is a fiasco of huge proportion.
The only “good” someone may get out of this indictment is that it appears Rep. Smith has not rolled on anyone, the “G” gave up on flipping him, and thus the Grand Jury finally indicted today.
Maybe Smith can;
(1) Go to Springfield, (2) be forced to SIT in his seat on the floor, but (3) hand over his voting key to Leader Currie, and he can (4) collect his per diem, (5) be present for his constituents, and (6) report back to the district what is going on.
Except for the voting, Smith would be acting like any other “Mushroom” so Alderman Ervin can’t complain too much(?)
This is all pathetic!
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 4:19 pm
YDD- wasn’t Blago impeached twice? I seem to remember he was impeached in the final days of one GA and again in the beginning days of the next GA.
Comment by It's Just Me Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 4:27 pm
Alderman Ervin is a beast. that man could be governor for all I care. im from the west side and he is doing the most, in a good way. Derrick smith and the jesse white crew, they messing up big time. time to revoke white’s license
Comment by Blue Grass Democrat Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 4:36 pm
His lawyer is saying he won’t resign, from the Tribune.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-feds-state-rep-derrick-smith-indicted-on-bribery-charges-20120410,0,5795712.story
Comment by Wensicia Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 5:07 pm
==The only “good” someone may get out of this indictment is that it appears Rep. Smith has not rolled on anyone, the “G” gave up on flipping him, and thus the Grand Jury finally indicted today.==
I suspect that he was never in the position to have the goods on anyone.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 8:46 pm
@Rich -
Unless they change the House Rules, they can’t refuse to seat him. I know your expert and my expert disagree over the Constitution, but the House Rules provide quite narrow criteria for either overturning an election or disqualifying an elected candidate.
Of course, they COULD change the House Rules, but they’d have to be very careful about how they did it so that they don’t run afoul of the Constitution. Last time I checked, the Constitution still trumped the House rules.
My bet is, the Speaker will play it safe and run an independent candidate, as Secretary White indicated.
@It’s Just Me -
The Constitution specifically says that no member may be removed from the General Assembly twice for the same offense.
The rules for the Executive and Judiciary branches are quite different.
For example, under the Constitution an Executive officer or judge who is impeached and removed can be barred from holding future state office. A lawmaker who is removed cannot be barred from holding future office. Only a criminal conviction would prevent them from holding office.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Tuesday, Apr 10, 12 @ 11:29 pm
=====The only “good” someone may get out of this indictment is that it appears Rep. Smith has not rolled on anyone, the “G” gave up on flipping him, and thus the Grand Jury finally indicted today.==
I suspect that he was never in the position to have the goods on anyone.===
The “G” took a shot, found out, what we all suspected, that Smith was close to NO ONE, so Smith gets no seat on the bus …
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Apr 11, 12 @ 8:04 am
Sorry, last post was mine, full disclosure.
My Bad
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Apr 11, 12 @ 8:04 am